We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
While the Fantom Test::verifyEq() does imply actual and expected parameter names:
Test::verifyEq()
actual
expected
Void verifyEq(Obj? a, Obj? b, Str? msg := null)
It's native Java method implementation does:
public void verifyEq(Object expected, Object actual) { verifyEq(expected, actual, null); } public void verifyEq(Object expected, Object actual, String msg)
This is apparent when actual and expected are strings with a different number of lines:
class MyTest: Test { Void test1() { verifyEq("line1 \n line 2", "line 1") } }
produces
TEST FAILED sys::TestErr: Test failed: Expected 2 lines, actual 1 lines
Following the standard of expected being the first parameter, if I write:
class MyTest : Test { Void test2() { verifyEq("expected", "actual") } }
It obviously fails, but if I double click on the failure, I get this dialogue:
It could be argued that Fantom should reverse its parameter list, but I don't think Brian will buy it!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
e1e167e
No branches or pull requests
While the Fantom
Test::verifyEq()
does implyactual
andexpected
parameter names:It's native Java method implementation does:
This is apparent when
actual
andexpected
are strings with a different number of lines:produces
Following the standard of
expected
being the first parameter, if I write:It obviously fails, but if I double click on the failure, I get this dialogue:

It could be argued that Fantom should reverse its parameter list, but I don't think Brian will buy it!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: